Here is everything I can think of, that makes the Noah’s Ark story not only a complete impossibility, but incompetently inconsistent.

To start, God claims “man’s wickedness was widespread on the earth and that every scheme his mind thought of was nothing but evil all the time.”

Not only is this the most extreme of generalizations—they are ALL corrupt and evil, even in their thoughts, besides Noah and his family? Noah and company learned proper morals and behavior in a total vacuum? And didn’t have any friends at all? Where did he learn the art of shipbuilding, and of all the tools and concepts necessary for crafting one? From those “wicked” humans, who must’ve utilized teamwork? So, not only is this a wildly extreme condemnation, but how—with this display—is God himself not corrupt and mad with power? It’s like a school shooter declaring themselves the arbiter of justice.

If “every creature had corrupted its way on the earth”, wouldn’t each pair of animals saved still carry that same corruption within them? Or did there just-so-happen to exist seven righteous pairs of clean animals, and two righteous pairs of the unclean—an oddly precise amount?

Who built this ark? 450 feet long, with three decks? It’s extremely unlikely they would’ve had any help—as no one else was selected to survive. That leaves his wife, his three sons, and their wives. Eight people in all. Eight people to build the thing? Eight people to shepherd all those animals, and half-a-year’s food for everyone involved, aboard? Eight people to take care of the feeding and cleaning for what must have been well over 100 animals (and that’s low-balling it)? I’m just not seeing it. Imagine the stink. Imagine dealing with unruly animals that would have had very little room to move about. And would simple gopher wood really keep them all in place?

God’s final count for the pairs (seven pairs of the clean, seven pairs of the birds, two pairs of the unclean) is given only seven days before the flood. And what about sealife, or land animals that can survive in water? If all life on Earth is corrupted, that’s a pretty huge omission to make. Everything else is sentenced to death, but sealife gets the free pass? This “God” is a bumbling idiot.

Noah disembarks, and the first thing he does is make burnt offerings out of “every kind of clean animal and every kind of clean bird”. God finds the aroma “pleasing”. …That’s just disgusting. And these two are considered “righteous”, and “blameless”? It gets worse.

God’s “covenant” is as good as nothing:

“Never again will every creature be wiped out by the waters of a flood. There will never again be a flood to destroy the earth.”

”Water will never again become a flood to destroy every creature. […] This is the sign of the covenant that I have confirmed between Me and every creature on earth.”

God keeps his options for destruction and genocide wide-open, by repeatedly stating within his “covenant”, that only the use of a flood is off-limits. This is a promise that is as good as nothing.

The next story about this most-righteous man, Noah, calls into question both his morals, and God’s judgment of character. In Genesis 9, Noah gets drunk off wine and randomly takes all of his clothing off, before falling asleep. One son, Ham, tells his brothers, who proceed to cover Noah with a cloak, without looking.

Noah is enraged upon waking, and curses not Ham—but Ham’s son, Canaan—to be “the lowest of slaves to his brothers”. This is the “blameless” man God picked to be the sole human inheritor of the Earth?

Noah’s “family records”. All people mentioned died post-flood, so evidence ought to exist. Noah lived to be almost an entire millennium old—950 years. And Shem’s age was 600, upon death. Noah’s descendants continued living to ludicrously lengthy ages, and yet, there has never been any human being, or hominid-like creature, discovered whose age even comes close to these figures. These “records” also do not list a single wife or daughter’s name. No women are listed, at all. Period. ZERO. It speaks as if men father children themselves, all on their own.

Beyond the “family records”, the story also gives exact dimensions for the ark, and exact dates of departure (“the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month”) and landing (“the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the mountains of Ararat”), so no—this story is not a metaphor. It’s clearly positioned to be taken as literal history.

Only one man’s story, and it’s stuffed to the gills with despicably questionable content. Most of the major stories and figures in the Bible fare no better.

Next up! Abraham, chosen and blessed by God above all others—is a rich slaveholder who rapes his wife’s slave to have his first child. The slave, escaping the couple’s torment, is found by an “angel of the Lord”, who tells her: “You must go back to your mistress and submit to her mistreatment.”

That God—so incorruptible and righteous, isn’t He?